Well, that turns out to be only half the story.
J. and I initially thought this must have been our half-uncle's birth, but I didn't have his birthdate and couldn't be sure. Today, I was trying to nail down some information about her oldest son, and realized that the birthdate given in the printed family genealogy differs in the year but not the month and date from what pipl was finding for me. And let's just say I trust pipl a whole lot more, because it is going through an assemblage of public records (voters records, directories, blah, blah, bleeping, blah). Easy to lie to the family genealogist. No reason to lie -- and a lot of reason not to lie -- when registering to vote.
To make a sordid story short, if you get married in June, you should not be producing a baby in the first week of November of the same year. No wonder she went back down to the States to produce the child.
There's a marriage that produces no offspring, and then a third marriage. It is _as I am writing_ this entry, that I realize these are the dates of the weddings:
I don't have the exact date for the last marriage, but I'd be happy to make a guess!
In any event, after the Jun 20 wedding, a baby arrived on ... January 30.
Also, a conspicuous lack of family stories about how premature her babies were.
I only get more convinced every day that genealogy is fundamentally a rude activity. Sort of like farting, I think genealogy is somewhat inevitable -- we're all kinda curious about where we came from -- but nevertheless stinky and socially inappropriate. Or, at any rate, it uncovers a lot of inappropriateness.